New PowerBooks use PowerPC 7457

[MacRumors]

Apple posted developer notes for the new 15" PowerBook (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/15inchPowerBookG4/index.html) and 17" PowerBook (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/17inchPowerBookG4/index.html) on their Developer site.

The documents provide some detailed information on the hardware of the new PowerBooks.

There has been some debate about which processor is used in the new PowerBooks. With the increased L2 Cache (512k), it's clear that the computers use one of Motorola's newest processors: the 7447/7457. The only difference between these two processors is that the 7457 has the capability to support additional L3 Cache... which the PowerBooks do not incorporate at this time.

The documentation from Apple, however, links explicity to the MPC7457 information page (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7457&nodeId=018rH3bTdG8653) at Motorola's site for further reference.

[mgargan1]

i don't think that losing the L3 cache is too too terrible, because L2 cache is much faster anyways. If you were to lose any performance, it shouldn't be too bad. Plus the .33GHz increase... these new powerbooks should be very quick. The problem with following these new updates is that it makes you wanna get rid of your current computer, and get one of the new ones. But I guess that's how computer companies want me to feel.

[arn]

yeah, the L2 cache is all good.

Just wanted to clarify, since there was a question.

arn

[coumerelli]

... which the PowerBooks do not incorporate at this time.

This tone of voice sounds like they would like for the L3 to be incorporated. No?

[Powerbook G5]

Either way, there is no difference at all between the two from what I understand, right? Since the only difference between the two is the capability to support L3 cache.

[Ti_Pousin]

Why didn't they put L3 cache? no performance improvement, or cost effective not good enough???

edit: I know the L3 is 1/3 CPU speed and L2 at CPU speed, but both should be better.

[blueflame]

thats a bummer

[agentmouthwash]

Somebody on macnn.com who has the 15" powerbook already said it runs much cooler and quieter.

[fabsgwu]

Hmm, so maybe the next update will bring in the missing L3 cache? Maybe with all of Moto's production problems, they decided to forego the extra complication of adding it now....

[arn]

Originally posted by fabsgwu
Hmm, so maybe the next update will bring in the missing L3 cache? Maybe with all of Moto's production problems, they decided to forego the extra complication of adding it now....

The L3 has nothing to do with Motorola - as my understanding, it's outside the chip.

Beyond this, it's possible it could be added later by Apple -- but the return appears it would be minimal... due to the improvement size of the L2 cache.

arn

[shadowfax]

boy, won't it be nice when they get 1 MB L2 Cache...

L3 cache is pretty useless if you have real DDR RAM. i think the L2 is much more important.

[Col127]

any word about which chip is in the new 12"? it'd make sense for apple to use the same chip across the entire line, wouldn't it?

[mmmbop]

Originally posted by fabsgwu
Hmm, so maybe the next update will bring in the missing L3 cache?

The next update brings in the G5, surely?

Sorry, is it too early to start G5 speculation again?

[MacUser1]

Originally posted by mmmbop
The next update brings in the G5, surely?

That would be nice, and good for Apple, too. But have you seen the heatsink on those G5's? I'd love to see PowerBook G5's, even though I don't need one, but it may take one more revision for Apple to put the G5 in the PowerBooks

[mdntcallr]

Good golly, I love these new powerbooks. only thing is that the technology in them is suited for last June instead of a today release.

Hope the next version has a DVD+-RW Drive.

One note, the radeon 9600 graphics chip is the best one out now, i think even over best Nvidia.

they are pretty good for what they are though. I am happy enough i may order one. only thing is that these are pretty much the same machines they should have released months ago.

Bummer

[Stella]

There hasn't been a PB rumour today, so I'm going to put that straight.

A good friend of mine who works for
Apple UK tells me that they've sorted out the G5 heating problems due to IBM using the revised smaller version of the processor.

They are able to run a PB to run at 2.5gig, the heat generated is the same as the old 15", so this is fine. These new PB are on course for March 2004 release.

Additionally, Apple have been working along with a Fuel Cell manufacter in secret and have gained leaps and bounds over competitors (read: intel) and they are only around 6 months away from production...

Tests so far == 10 hours battery life, running on the G5 PB. So, I can get from Toronto to London using one of these PB on one battery

:-D

Originally posted by mmmbop
The next update brings in the G5, surely?

Sorry, is it too early to start G5 speculation again?

[agentmouthwash]

I want to upgrade the RAM asap and the Apple store prices were too high. Does anybody know any websites that sells good ram cheap? I would most likely like to fill up the 2gb quota.

[esheep2001]

I posted this on the last thread but many may have finished reading that.

Here is a comparison between a 1GHz/1GB Ram Ti and 1.25GHz/1GB Ram new Al.

The site is in French but if you scroll right down the figures speak for themselves :)

http://www.xrings.net/xrings/article.php3?id_article=239

e.

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by agentmouthwash
I want to upgrade the RAM asap and the Apple store prices were too high. Does anybody know any websites that sells good ram cheap? I would most likely like to fill up the 2gb quota.

www.crucial.com has been vgood to me.

[esheep2001]

Originally posted by Stella
They are able to run a PB to run at 2.5gig... March 2004 release... with a Fuel Cell manufacter in secret... Tests so far == 10 hours battery life, running on the G5 PB.

Hmm, I've heard similar. I heard simultaneous 3GHz roll out of power mac and books, July 2004 and the fuel cell is actually giving something like 2 days typical use from a single charge/cannister. I also heard that the design will be along the lines of the G5 desktop only the fans will be blowing downwards thereby allowing the laptop to float comfortably in mid air :)

Sorry, but starting G5 rumors now is madness and I simply refuse to believe _ANYTHING_ that anyone says right now, even if it proves correct later, I mean, what's the point?

e.

[rog]

Originally posted by shadowfax
boy, won't it be nice when they get 1 MB L2 Cache...

L3 cache is pretty useless if you have real DDR RAM. i think the L2 is much more important.

I guess that's the key question. Do these PBs finally make real use of DDR or is it still a hack job with minimal benefits like on the MDD towers & iMacs?

The Barefeats results show that the new 1.25 GHz PB is about 20% faster than the old 1.0. Just not good enough after 10.5 months of waiting. What they should be doing is adding the full 2MB L3 that these chips can support. Given that Apple is so hobbled by Motorola & their slow chip clock speeds, they have no right to complain unless they pull out all the stops and do everything they can to make these as fast as possible. Why don't these "Pro" models have 128MB VRAM, 7200 or at least 5400 RPM drives as standard? They should. Apple will continue to lose market share unless their products are dramatically faster. Being almost caught up or a lot slower won't cut it.

[tny]

Originally posted by mmmbop
The next update brings in the G5, surely?

Sorry, is it too early to start G5 speculation again?

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the next update brings in a version of the G3, maybe called something else to indicate that it is in the class of a higher-speed G4 rather than merely a higher-speed G3 (M5 for Mobile generation 5?).

[Some_Big_Spoon]

Does the new 12" have 7455 or 7457? I'm looking at every available doc and can't get the answer.

From MacRumors feed during the keynote, it was stated that "Yes, they ALL have the new 7457", but that was the only conformation I've had.

Arn, any word?

-Spoon

[esheep2001]

The barefeats results make sad reading :( A comparison of one of the slowest Centrinos agains the fastest G4 and the G4 can barely hold it's head up :(

I know, I know! There are other reasons for owning the pbooks but if people go by these then they ceratinly won't want to switch. Personally I would still like a pbook as it would complement the DPG5 I'm getting but as my only machine I'd be looking for a Centrino any day :(

I hope IBM are doing some fast development on a portable version of the G5 'cos if there isn't something in place by Jan next year Apple may well be out of the laptop business altogether!

e.

[macmunch]

This Speculation about ohh why is there no Level 3 chache ohohoho thats lame !

Look at the Benchs at Barefeat the 15" and 17" are burning !

They kill the old PowerBook 17" with L3 !


So first look before flame .... :D


Update: I forgott see it so the Update of the PowerBooks was not Low it was High, on this benchmarks you can see you would need a 1.5 or even 1.6 GHz G4 PowerBook with the old chip to have a Chance against the new PowerBook, so very good update for normal Apple updates.

Motorola made a good Chip (this time) one time :D

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by agentmouthwash
I want to upgrade the RAM asap and the Apple store prices were too high. Does anybody know any websites that sells good ram cheap? I would most likely like to fill up the 2gb quota. www.dealram.com will give you a good price comparison

I like OWC (www.macsales.com) myself

[csimmons]

Originally posted by esheep2001
The barefeats results make sad reading :( A comparison of one of the slowest Centrinos agains the fastest G4 and the G4 can barely hold it's head up :(

e.

Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense. Had you read the results and paid attention, you'd have seen that the Centrino beat the G4 in some tests, it was soundly b*tch-slapped by the G4 in the remeining tests.:D

[Websnapx2]

Originally posted by esheep2001
The barefeats results make sad reading :( A comparison of one of the slowest Centrinos agains the fastest G4 and the G4 can barely hold it's head up :(


they lost two out of six test. the photoshop one they lost by two seconds and the other is not a real-world test any way. what's to complain about? The G4 is going through that will be sorted out soon enough.

[QCassidy352]

Originally posted by esheep2001
I posted this on the last thread but many may have finished reading that.

Here is a comparison between a 1GHz/1GB Ram Ti and 1.25GHz/1GB Ram new Al.

The site is in French but if you scroll right down the figures speak for themselves :)

http://www.xrings.net/xrings/article.php3?id_article=239

e.

thanks for that link. That, plus the barefeats results, have sold me: the lack of L3 cache doesn't matter. The new powerbooks soundly beat the old ones. Now if only I could afford one... ;)

[ddtlm]

shadowfax:

L3 cache is pretty useless if you have real DDR RAM. i think the L2 is much more important.
Wowa there! L3 is not useless at all, even with high-speed FSB's and RAM. For example, consider Intel's Xeons with the L3's, and consider their upcoming "extreme" Pentium thats been in the news recently (apparently 90nm is delayed :) ). You can bet the G5 would be much faster (at some things) if it had Xeon-like L3's, as would be the 7457. I'll hazard to guess that with 512k of L2 Apple decided that a 1MB L3 wasn't significant, a 2MB L3 was too expensive, and that there was no need to have an L3 on a older-tech machine than the G5 desktops. Don't want people asking why the G5 doesn't have an L3, do we? ;)

rog:

I guess that's the key question. Do these PBs finally make real use of DDR or is it still a hack job with minimal benefits like on the MDD towers & iMacs?
Pretty sure its the "fake" DDR. The 7447/7457 has always been said to be pin-compatible, which means it uses the same FSB tech. But really, that is not nearly such a problem as everyone tries to make it out to be. Sure, it slows down some super-optimized AltiVec stuff, but 166mhz x 64bit is plenty for just about everything non-AltiVec that a 1.25ghz G4 can do. G4's are just not that fast. (Of course removing the L3 increased demand on the FSB/RAM).

Why don't these "Pro" models have 128MB VRAM, 7200 or at least 5400 RPM drives as standard?
In addition to costing more, these items would generate more heat. I'd say they would make nice options, but not standards.

Some_Big_Spoon:

Does the new 12" have 7455 or 7457? I'm looking at every available doc and can't get the answer.
512k L2 on-die, on a G4 == 7447/7457. 256k L2 on-die, on a G4 == 7445/7455 or 7450 (and 7440?).

csimmons:

Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense.
The P-M was very compeditive with CPU power, but died on the games. Probably a really crappy integrated video chip (I didn't see if they said what it was anywhere).

Edit: Fixed statement about PM performance before someone complains.

[tuc]

Originally posted by Ti_Pousin
Why didn't they put L3 cache? no performance improvement, or cost effective not good enough???

I would guess mostly for heat reasons. It's cooler without that SRAM chip on the motherboard. (Battery lasts longer, too.)

Plus this way Apple can put one on later if they need to rev the AlBooks and the processors aren't enough faster by themselves

Also a 1MB L3 cache won't help a 512KB L2 cache as much is it helps a 256KB L2 cache. The larger the L2 cache is, the larger the L3 cache has to be for the same incremental improvement.

[arn]

Originally posted by Some_Big_Spoon
Does the new 12" have 7455 or 7457? I'm looking at every available doc and can't get the answer.

From MacRumors feed during the keynote, it was stated that "Yes, they ALL have the new 7457", but that was the only conformation I've had.

Arn, any word?


Since the 12" PowerBook Processor also has 512k of L2 cache, that means it's either the 7447 or 7457. I would bet 7457 since Apple is using it in their 15, and 17 inch.

It doesn't really matter... since the 7457 and 7447 are functionaly the same. Like I said, the only diff is that the 7457 as the capability to use L3 cache. But none of the PowerBooks have L3 cache... so the difference is academic.

arn

[esheep2001]

Originally posted by csimmons
Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense. Had you read the results and paid attention, you'd have seen that the Centrino beat the G4 in some tests, it was soundly b*tch-slapped by the G4 in the remeining tests.:D

No. I did read the rest of the tests. My point is that this is a comparison of the _SLOWEST_ Centrino against the _FASTEST_ G4. Ok so I guess I should wait for the 1.7 Centrino results (or find some as I'm sure there must be some somewhere) to get a true feeling for just how good/bad this is. The problem is that Intel are on a roll with the Centrino with yet more speed bumps round the corner, where are Moto/Apple? They are at their bleeding edge and struggling to get more out of an ageing and decrepit architecture. I really _really_ hope IBM can pull something out of the hat but at this moment in time it doesn't feel good. Compared to past pbooks yes, but compared to the competition, well, it's like the powermacs were a few months ago without the advantage of MP. Without Apples supporters and fans I feel pbooks would be being left on the shelves in droves :(

e.

[macphoria]

According to Barefeats, new PowerBooks are slower than Centrino 1.3GHz in Photoshop functions. That sucks. Photoshop should be an area where Macs totally dominates PCs.

[mmmbop]

Originally posted by esheep2001
Hmm, I've heard similar. I heard simultaneous 3GHz roll out of power mac and books, July 2004 and the fuel cell is actually giving something like 2 days typical use from a single charge/cannister. I also heard that the design will be along the lines of the G5 desktop only the fans will be blowing downwards thereby allowing the laptop to float comfortably in mid air :)

I've always said give the public what they want :)

I'm certainly interested in what magic IBM can create with the G3, especially now that the pro desktop line is sorted with the G5 allowing the G3 to flourish a little. A high-clocking G3 with 'Velocity Engine' (I love Apple marketing, but that sounds so Casio) - the rumoured Mojave chip, possibly in a dual form, could re-invigorate the pb line-up.

On the flip side, now the 970 is here, a lot of people (myself included) think a G5 pb is inevitable. Apple really did make a statement with the G5's case design and heat sinks (scorchio!), but other than the beefed-up G3, what options do they have? Sticking with Motorola can't be a long-term solution.

[Photorun]

Cripes, bunch of whiners. Apple did about as good as they could at this time with what they had, stop yer grousing. It did pretty well against Centrino in some aspects, admittedly a low end one. I checked around at some other sites like Dell and Compaq and you load up a Centrino speed to outpace a Mac and the prices start to level out all without giving you a solid operating system like OS X not to mention the fit and finish of the new PBs are amazing... fit and finish on a Dell...? Hello, piece a hunka plastic crap!

These aren't gee whiz wow make the peecee users jealous machines... but they're darn good machines. If I had the extra cash I'd be getting one myself.

[blogo]

Originally posted by csimmons
Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense. Had you read the results and paid attention, you'd have seen that the Centrino beat the G4 in some tests, it was soundly b*tch-slapped by the G4 in the remeining tests.:D

In the game tests, yes, but which GPU did the centrino use?

[esheep2001]

Originally posted by Photorun
Apple did about as good as they could at this time with what they had, stop yer grousing. It did pretty well against Centrino in some aspects, admittedly a low end one. I checked around at some other sites like Dell and Compaq and you load up a Centrino speed to outpace a Mac and the prices start to level out all without giving you a solid operating system like OS X not to mention the fit and finish of the new PBs are amazing... fit and finish on a Dell...? Hello, piece a hunka plastic crap!

Yep. That is one of the pbooks saving graces but often that doesn't matter to the blinkered Intel/M$ buyer. All they see is speed (MHz) and cost. Style, OS, finish, ease of use are all things that are secondary unfortunately.


These aren't gee whiz wow make the peecee users jealous machines... but they're darn good machines. If I had the extra cash I'd be getting one myself.

Same here, despite my whingeing! I would love a 15" 1.25 but as a second machine, not as my primary, mainly because I'm doing video/audio work for which I will have a G5. Unfortunately, a Centrino looks more attractive as a secondary machine as I don't need it to be fully loaded and I don't need all the bells and whistles but processor speed is an issue. But the main thing is that I can get one for less.

e.

[singletrack]

What processor did the old 12" use? If it was the 7445 and not the 7455, the 7447 would be a pin compatible drop in replacement and a much easier motherboard 'redesign'.

Lack of L3 seems to make miniscule difference in the benchmarks on the 15/17 but it'd be nice to see some 12" benchmarks as it should now actually be faster in all tests than an iBook.

The Barefeats benchmarks seem a little odd to me. The Centrino 1.3 seems to have a particularly bad graphics chip though perhaps not as bad as the nVidia cards in the old 17"! It's quite possible it would have done better if it had. Not quoting the graphics cards isn't very useful.

The Bryce benchmark is interesting too as it shows a 900Mhz iBook which has a 512K L2, beating a 1Ghz 256K L2 17" G4. I presume Bryce doesn't go well with L3 caches. The P-M 1.3 get's trounced there too which goes to show Cinebench and Photoshop aren't running optimally on the Mac or Bryce on the PC isn't - perhaps Bryce used a different compiler. Motorola also released new software libraries with the 7447 and 7457 with improvements over gcc - are Adobe, Maxxon etc using those?

[Photorun]

, a Centrino looks more attractive as a secondary machine as I don't need it to be fully loaded and I don't need all the bells and whistles but processor speed is an issue. But the main thing is that I can get one for less.

Buying a PieceCrap and following a pack instead of being original and getting a better overall machine for a little more... no wonder your handle is esheep.

[jrinderle]

I question those benchmarks. Does anyone know what video card was used in the Centrino laptop? In fact, does anyone know the make or model?

It is not fair to say:

"I threw in the Cetrino 1.3GHz numbers for a reality check. As you can see, it's faster in some ways and slower in others. But the newest PowerBooks are too cool for the competition. Game over"

At 1.3Ghz, that is a very low end Centrino. In general, the price to performance ratio is better for Intel. Even IBM has more cost effective laptop models than Apple.

My complaint has nothing to do with the new PowerBook models. In fact, I am strongly considering 'making the switch'.

But those benchmarks are hardly objective. No consideration is given to price. No specs. are given, etc. My suspicion is that the Centrino would have easily won all of the tests if it had a better graphics card. In any case, I am sure it costs far less than the PowerBook.

[jrinderle]

Originally posted by Websnapx2
they lost two out of six test. the photoshop one they lost by two seconds and the other is not a real-world test any way. what's to complain about? The G4 is going through that will be sorted out soon enough.

I agree -- that was not a real-world test. Furthermore, it is difficult to benchmark across platforms.

However, the video card could have easily been the reason the Centrino lost the other two tests.

[macphoria]

But those benchmarks are hardly objective. No consideration is given to price. No specs. are given, etc. My suspicion is that the Centrino would have easily won all of the tests if it had a better graphics card. In any case, I am sure it costs far less than the PowerBook.
I don't know about "would have easily won all of the tests" but I do think graphics card was a big factor that resulted in poor performance in lower half of the tests.

I prefer Macs over PC's despite this result because I do believe Macs are higher quality machines over all. But it still is disappointing.

[ddtlm]

Photorun:

Buying a PieceCrap and following a pack instead of being original and getting a better overall machine for a little more... no wonder your handle is esheep.
Your post is eliteism, immaturity and computer-bigotry all wrapped into one bundle. How nice.

[gotohamish]

Originally posted by mdntcallr
Good golly, I love these new powerbooks. only thing is that the technology in them is suited for last June instead of a today release.

Hope the next version has a DVD+-RW Drive.
Better faster mobile graphics chip


they are pretty good for what they are though. I am happy enough i may order one. only thing is that these are pretty much the same machines they should have released months ago.

Bummer

Well, who's to say it isn't a DVD±RW drive? Mike at XLR8YourMac had never come across the Superdrive used in one of his reader's 15" ones, and that's saying something. Admittedly, it's probably disabled until Panther if it is, but still, perhaps better than nothing.

[mrsebastian]

got the 1 gig 17" a week ago and just echanged it for the new 1.3 gig version. can't say that i feel a huge difference. either way i'm happy, happy!

[dongmin]

Originally posted by esheep2001
No. I did read the rest of the tests. My point is that this is a comparison of the _SLOWEST_ Centrino against the _FASTEST_ G4. Ok so I guess I should wait for the 1.7 Centrino results (or find some as I'm sure there must be some somewhere) to get a true feeling for just how good/bad this is. The problem is that Intel are on a roll with the Centrino with yet more speed bumps round the corner, where are Moto/Apple? They are at their bleeding edge and struggling to get more out of an ageing and decrepit architecture. I really _really_ hope IBM can pull something out of the hat but at this moment in time it doesn't feel good. Compared to past pbooks yes, but compared to the competition, well, it's like the powermacs were a few months ago without the advantage of MP. Without Apples supporters and fans I feel pbooks would be being left on the shelves in droves :(

e.

you're basically right about this. The G4 is a dead chip, as far as personal computing is concerned. Apple is just trying to make something out of nothing. The fact that it's even remotely competitive is encouraging. Also, Panther should speed things up, mainly for G5s but also for all other systems, according to early testers. Besides the CPU, the new PowerBooks are seriously tricked out systems, a solid package.

[ima_pseudonym]

The new pbooks are running 10.2.7, right? Any developers out there with insight into how much of the speed diff. (if any) was due to os improvements? Any chance there are improvements to the opengl drivers for the ati cards in the tibook?

[Somebody]

Originally posted by Photorun
Buying a PieceCrap and following a pack instead of being original and getting a better overall machine for a little more... no wonder your handle is esheep.


So if he buys a machine like those used by tens or hundreds of millions of others, he's a 'sheep'. But if he buys one used by only millions of others, he's being 'original'.


Strident nonsense like this is exactly the kind of advocacy the Mac doesn't need. It's people like you that get Mac users branded as kooks or elitists.


Anyone who sees you arguing like this about platforms is going to conclude that you advocate Macs, not because you've made some sort of honest or objective comparison of the relative merits of the platforms, but to rather to fill some psychological need you have to differentiate yourself from 'the herd'.

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by shadowfax
boy, won't it be nice when they get 1 MB L2 Cache...

L3 cache is pretty useless if you have real DDR RAM. i think the L2 is much more important.

Each "level" is approximately an order of magnitude slower than the last on typical (ie, non-burst) accesses. While the L3 isn't much faster than main memory on a clock-for-clock basis, you must take into consideration:

1) L3 doesn't lie on the other side of the System Controller and CPU FSB. Accessing L3 is significantly faster than the FSB, even without taking latencies into account.

2) L3 is very low-latency. You don't waitn 20+ cycles to pull data from L3; it is just a few cycles.

IOW, fast DDR memory is certainly no replacement for L3 cache.

More L2 cache will help significantly, but it just expands the "hot zone size"; if your app uses more than 512K data then you're stuck going to 10-100x slower RAM.

The theory being, of course, that most apps' hot zone will fit inside L2, or at least a significant enough portion that L3 isn't worth the extra cost.

[CrackedButter]

Originally posted by Codemonkey
www.crucial.com has been vgood to me.

Strange this is, i went to crucial to spot some RAM for my new PB and it was infact more expensive than Apple, instead i bought it from Apple!

[hat]

I'm about to purchase a new 15"/Superdrive next week, and the lack of L3 cache also had me in shock for a while, though I must admit, I don't know enough about the technicalities to argue with the "doubled-up L2 is more important anyway" statement. If that is to be true, then I'm happy.

All this because I use it for audio, more specifically ProTools, where an L3 cache always seemed to improve performance over other machines (I had a QS867 with 2MB L3), and now it leaves me wondering how much will this affect things overall. There's a lot of give and take, a faster processor, no L3, a doubled L2, etc...

Considering all this, is it fair to assume that performance should be about the same as my old machine, perhaps "slightly" better? Anyone else use their Macs for audio who can share their thoughts on this?

Thanks!

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by csimmons
Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense. Had you read the results and paid attention, you'd have seen that the Centrino beat the G4 in some tests, it was soundly b*tch-slapped by the G4 in the remeining tests.:D

Ummm ... the b*tch slapping came as a result of the graphics card (which is why the 7455-based PowerBooks were likewise soundly slapped in those tests).

As no graphics chip is cited for the Centrino, you can't even use those results for comparison. Most likely, this is using bundled Intel graphics (a Centrino 1.3GHz is the extreme-low-end of the Centrino line ... hardly the type of notebook you'd put a "real" ATI or nVidia graphics chip in).

IMHO, I completely agree with the first poster: the G4s in the PowerBooks were thoroughly outmatched by the slowest current-generation Intel laptop out there.

[ddtlm]

hat:

I don't think we'll know what the L3 was worth vs the new L2 until we see some new 1ghz PB's take on some told 1ghz PB's. I must say though, the L3-less machines did better than I expected.

[blizaine]

Originally posted by CrackedButter
Strange this is, i went to crucial to spot some RAM for my new PB and it was infact more expensive than Apple, instead i bought it from Apple!

Keep in mind the 512MB ($100) from apple is total memory, where-as the 512MB ($140) from Crucial is an additional module to the 256MB that is already in there = 768MB total.

If all you want is 512MB total, it would in-fact be cheaper to purchase the 256MB upgrade from Crucial ($49). This would bring your total to 512MB. It would be $100 to get 512MB from apple.

;)

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by arn
It doesn't really matter... since the 7457 and 7447 are functionaly the same. Like I said, the only diff is that the 7457 as the capability to use L3 cache. But none of the PowerBooks have L3 cache... so the difference is academic.

arn

AND, the physical difference: the 7447 is smaller (same size as the 7445, which I believe was used in the 12").

Hmmm. Academic? I think the answer gives a little insight into Apple's plans.

Leaving 7457 on the MB despite the savings in using a 7447 instead might indicate one of:

1) Apple didn't want to reroute any of their motherboards (assuming the 7455-equipped 15" had been laid out previously) ... Note that nothing on the MB seems to have changed here, with the exception of enabling the USB2 controller that had always been there. This would indicate a fairly short life for these PowerBooks. If the 12" went to 7457 instead of 7447 (assuming I am correct that it had been using the 7445 previously), this theory is a bit in question, as that would mean a relayout of the MB was done for the 12" for no obvious benefit.

2) Apple may plan to add L3 cache in the next speed-bump. This would indicate an expectation that no other advance might be able to be made in the next 6-9 months. This would indicate a longer life with this design. If the 12" was re-laid to accomodate the 7457 chip then this theory gains in credence: Apple must be planning on using the L3 in a speed-bump.

3) Moto gave Apple a "deal it can't refuse" financially or contractually to use the higher-priced 7457 across its line. Either the 7457 was cheaper, or Apple had committed to using it in x number of products, or Moto just hasn't been able to produce the 7447 chips yet. This would also explain the 12" being relaid, but it would have to be a very strong discount or contract to justify spending money laying out a MB for no consumer benefit ...

Of course, the answer is fairly easy to determine: someone who has bought a new PowerBook should open it up and gaze at the processor markings ...

[rjstanford]

Originally posted by jettredmont
IMHO, I completely agree with the first poster: the G4s in the PowerBooks were thoroughly outmatched by the slowest current-generation Intel laptop out there. Has anyone seen real-world power consumption tests out there yet? Apple reduced their estimate by 1/2 an hour, thanks to the smaller batteries, but the procs draw so much less power...

Again, Apple isn't just competing with themselves, but with quotes like "The PCG-Z1SP fails to impress with its battery life. The battery juice can't even manage four hours - not exactly a laudable performance for a Centrino device in this class." from Tom's Hardware (http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030516/sony-14.html) (note that the IBM T-40 in this review from May managed four and a half hours of 113fps Quake 3 gaming on battery power, five and a half normal use).

I would have thought that by dropping consumption down so far, even with a 46 w/hr battery pack, that powerbook runtimes should have been much higher? Esp. with the 1ghz 12"? That's about the same as the 1.5ghz 15" Sony that inspired that quote above, and the Centrino should be drawing double the power of the new G4, shouldn't it? Or am I way off on its power consumption (going from debates about G4/G5 before release).

-Richard

[esheep2001]

Originally posted by Somebody
Strident nonsense like this is exactly the kind of advocacy the Mac doesn't need. It's people like you that get Mac users branded as kooks or elitists.


Anyone who sees you arguing like this about platforms is going to conclude that you advocate Macs, not because you've made some sort of honest or objective comparison of the relative merits of the platforms, but to rather to fill some psychological need you have to differentiate yourself from 'the herd'.

:)

Thanks for the defence, and the other poster too. It's good to see that this forum has people that are willing to think through arguments in a sensible manner.

The guy got it even more wrong as I did say that I want a pbook, but given the financial outlay and the fact that it would not be used on a day to day basis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to justify such an outlay when there are systems out there that will do the same or better _for me_ for less money. Maybe one day I'll be in a position to blow that sort of money but not yet. I know other people are and good luck to them, I'm sure they'll enjoy their pbooks too.

I'm a great believer in the right tools for the right job and right now the G5 is good for what I want to do workwise and a Centrino is good for what I want to do when I'm mobile. I'm careful to, on the whole, buy packages that are dual platform, which allows me such freedom. Coming from a PC world originally I know what it's like to get locked in to a single platform and it's not something I want to happen again unless there is no alternative.

e.

[Mr. MacPhisto]

Seems one of the biggest improvements is the L2 cache running at the clockrate of the processor instead of @ 667MHZ - as was the case on the old PBs. That and doubling the L2 significantly increases the speed. The faster FSB helps as well. Overall, not a bad update. Would have been a little better had it come in June, but it gives the PBs sufficient speed for now - and they can hold their own against Centrinos (even 1.6 GHZ ones).

[Wombatronic]

Do the new PBs have that different mouse button on them? The old 15" ones have a really nice smooth button, whereas the 12" at least had this sharp button that raises up another 1/16" or so. That button really irritates me; not clear to me why they changed it (anyone know?)

cheers,

[cbonz]

Yeah, I know this is too soon...but how many more updates do you think the G4 PB will go through before the G5 takes over. I use my computer for video editing but I'm a college student so I need the most bang for my buck. I can probably last this school year if necessary, but no way could I beyond that. I would love a G5 PB but a G4 PB would be great, I just want it to last me at least a few years.

edit: is it worth getting the G4 now...or is it probable that there will be a G5 pb by next August?

[cing2x]

in the developer's note, it says the new superdrive can support DVD-RW at 1X write and CD-R at 8X write. However, at the details page at the Apple Store, it doesn't mention supporting DVD-RW writing and says CD-R is at 16X.

Small beans maybe but what's the deal? grrr. i want DVD-RW!

[ddtlm]

rjstanford:

The battery life of a laptop is only partly based on how much power the CPU uses. The screen uses a lot, the disks use some, the video card can use a fair amount (esp nice ones like a R-9600).

the Centrino should be drawing double the power of the new G4, shouldn't it?
Centrino is the name of a package of hardware, so I assume you are referring to the Pentium M which is the CPU in that package. The P-M is a surprisingly good chip. It is powerful yet manages to use very little power, and Intel caps it power usage by some advanced throttling trickery, so that even the 1.6ghz model only uses 25W no matter what you throw at it. It will very difficult to counter that chip with a G4 or G5, cause the G4 is slower and the G5 presumably offers worse performance per W.

[Sun Baked]

M. Isobe pointed this out, which conforms to the W chip spec Apple has been using in the laptops ...

[QCassidy352]

it's the same argument that we've heard hundreds, no, thousands of times: "macs aren't fast enough. You get better price : performance on a PC. Their low end is our high end."

Anyone who really just wants the most raw speed per dollar, yes, buy a PC. Those who appreciate and understand that a computer is more than the clockspeed of its processor will continue to buy macs.

Stop asking what speed a mac is compared to a PC, and start asking which you'd rather use. Then buy accordingly -- and if the answer is PC, by all means, go for it. But please, please, stop whining about how macs are behind on speed.

[tizza]

Originally posted by agentmouthwash
Somebody on macnn.com who has the 15" powerbook already said it runs much cooler and quieter.
This is great. I was going to get the 12" but at the last moment went for the 15" for the extra screen size and processing power - can't wait to try out WCIII on my new PB!!

[sabroe]

Let Goole's Language Tools (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.xrings.net%2Fxrings%2Farticle.php3%3Fid_article%3D239&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&prev=%2Flanguage_tools) help you, if you can't read French, but want to read the test. It's not a perfect translation, but better than nothing.

I just hope it doesn't get any of the conclusions wrong... :-)

And to all of you who are dissapointed by missing L3 cache etc.: Buy a PowerBook, be happy, and buy a new one in two years when an even better machine is available. I find the discussions about whether this or that would improve the performance interesting, but I get the feeling that some people spend their time waiting instead of buying a machine and getting some work done.

I've done the same thing for a year and a half, because I wanted a digital camera. I always found missing features with new models, but then I decided to make my choise, and I am very glad I did. Now I can take all those photographs I want, and I can buy a new model anyday, if I feel like it (heh - and if I have the money).

Of cource, some models are not just "it" fx when it isn't significantly better than the previous model, but I believe that the new 15" PowerBook is perfect for my needs, and now all I have to do is finding the money for it...

/Sabroe

[ddtlm]

QCassidy352:

Stop asking what speed a mac is compared to a PC, and start asking which you'd rather use.
What most people would rather use is heavily influenced by speed compared to other options. Sorry to hear that this bothers you.

[depakote]

know you can upgrade a G3 to a G4 but does anyone know if it is going to be possible to upgrade a G4 to a G5? I assume not because you won't be able to upgrade PowerMac either? If not will I not be able to upgrade my new 17" PowerBook at all? (1.33Ghz will be last chip made?) Any feeback greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Paul

[ddtlm]

I just saw at a random Register page (about the P-M) that 5W is a reasonable figure for the power used by a laptop's LCD: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/32877.html That's less than I thought, so I guess processors matter more than I thought.

depakote:

There is very little hope of ever upgrading a G4 to a G5. I don't think its possible to upgrade the CPU's of modern laptops anyway.

[WM.]

Originally posted by Codemonkey
www.crucial.com has been vgood to me.
They don't have 1 GB SO-DIMMs, unfortunately (at least not for the PowerBooks). But they've been very good to me too.

WM

[WM.]

Originally posted by jettredmont
Note that nothing on the MB seems to have changed here, with the exception of enabling the USB2 controller that had always been there.
Not on the PowerBooks--the "PCI USB Controller" is new with this generation. Intrepid has three USB 1.1 root hubs built in, and that's what the previous 12" PB, 17" PB and 17" iMac used.

WM

[depakote]

So I won't be able to upgrade the speed at all? That's a bummer. I can't hold off another six months though. At least I got an iPod budnle right now.

Thanks,
Paul

[greenstork]

Originally posted by depakote
know you can upgrade a G3 to a G4 but does anyone know if it is going to be possible to upgrade a G4 to a G5? I assume not because you won't be able to upgrade PowerMac either? If not will I not be able to upgrade my new 17" PowerBook at all? (1.33Ghz will be last chip made?) Any feeback greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Paul

Paul considering the whole architecture of a G5 is radically different than a G4, I don't ever see this upgrade happening. The system controller, bus, etc. are totally different from my understanding.

[depakote]

If I got a G5 powerbook would it be possible to upgrade all the way up? I assume that I am at the max for the G4?

Thanks,
Paul

[WM.]

Originally posted by depakote
If I got a G5 powerbook would it be possible to upgrade all the way up?
Probably not. There are very, very few CPU-upgradable laptops. Some of the (earlier) PowerBook G3s were, I think--probably the Lombards were the last (introduced in early 1999, I think). But Apple hasn't made a laptop with an upgradable CPU since, and although I try to stay out of the PC world I don't think there are too many PC laptops with upgradable processors either.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "all the way up", either. Even if the future G5 PB does have an upgradable CPU, I doubt you'll be able to upgrade it more than one or two generations (like more than a 60% increase in clock speed). At this point, no one knows if even the PMG5s will be upgradable, since the cooling systems may be calibrated for the stock CPUs--not to mention the heatsinks: I doubt a third-party would be able to exactly replicate those fancy Apple custom jobs.

WM

[Ikash]

i ordered my powerbook 15" and they haven't shipped yet is this happening to everyone, i hope its not a 4 month wait like the G5's on orders. i hope theyd idn't just make enought to start the buyers

[Loopy]

Originally posted by esheep2001
Yep. That is one of the pbooks saving graces but often that doesn't matter to the blinkered Intel/M$ buyer. All they see is speed (MHz) and cost. Style, OS, finish, ease of use are all things that are secondary unfortunately.



Same here, despite my whingeing! I would love a 15" 1.25 but as a second machine, not as my primary, mainly because I'm doing video/audio work for which I will have a G5. Unfortunately, a Centrino looks more attractive as a secondary machine as I don't need it to be fully loaded and I don't need all the bells and whistles but processor speed is an issue. But the main thing is that I can get one for less.

e.

If you keep backups of your files on a firewire drive and your G5 gives up on you how would you continue to work if you had a pc. You would have to buy different sets of software + the job you are working on may not run.

I have a G52G + powerbook 15 1.25 on order. As a working musician who buys the software that I use I could not work on 2 platforms.

1. cost
2. compatibility
3. who the ******* wants a PC any way Logic Audio is the best and so is the Mac.


KEEP LIFE EASY BUY 2 MAC'S

[pigwin32]

While the new 15" is a worthy machine I can't help thinking it isn't the real deal, in Low End Mac (http://www.lowendmac.com/roadapples/index.shtml) nomenclature a Road Apple (and yes I still own and am quite fond of a Color Classic, another Road Apple). If we had seen this machine six months ago it would have slotted right into the line-up. Today it just seems to be tired right out of the blocks. CPU isn't much more than the previous release, same screen as previous release. Yes, the new graphics card is highly regarded, but unless you have been hanging out for blue tooth, FW800, USB2, or <sarcasm>woohoo</sarcasm> the illuminated keyboard, there's just not a lot here.

Personally, I was planning to upgrade to get a larger hard drive, better airport reception, and a superdrive. I was hoping there might have been a sweetener like a higher res screen or a significant jump in CPU. I can live with my current airport reception and I can wait for a superdrive. So I've just ordered the 7200 rpm Hitachi 60GB and an external FW case for the existing drive. My year old TiBook will keep me happy until Apple releases a worthwhile upgrade.

The new 15" is an interim measure. How interim will depend on how quickly Apple can come to market with an alternative chipset. And I believe they will be pulling out the stops to make that happen very quickly - these new AlBooks just aren't going to cut it.

Apropos a previous post I made on a different thread - one day soon SJ and the entire PB engineering team will be standing on the lawn in front of Mot giving them the bird.

Dave

[joelypolly]

While some people think that this laptop would be good six months ago they fail to see that every aspect of the laptop that apple could improve they did. The only limiting factor is the cpu.

The graphics card is the newest 9600 which only 2 other pc laptops have so far. Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, FW and USB2 are all welcome on a laptop.

[mrdrumbum]

is the 1gig g4 in the new 15inch better/faster than the 1gig g4 in the 15in tibook?

[Code101]

I ordered the 17"

My only problem with it is the HDD. I can't believe Apple didn't put the IBM/Hitachi 7K60 as an option. After I get my 17" Powerbook, I'm going to have to put the 7K60 drive in it. This drive is the only Laptop drive that's 7200 RPM and 8MB cache. Twice as fast as any of the 5400RPM drives.

[macsmith]

While these arn't the G5's I wish they were, they are still good computers and Apple is in my opinion very competative to there compatition.

I know the G4 PowerBooks arn't the fastest compared to the Centrino Laptops but up here in Canada they are a least cheaper.

Here's a price comparison to a Dell that I would say is vary comparible in speed, features and software.

Apple---------------------------------------Dell
PowerBook 15.2" 1280x854-----------Insperon 8600 15.4" 1280x800
1.25GHz G4-------------------------------1.3 GHz P-M
512k L2-------------------------------------512k L2
167MHz Bus--------------------------------400MHz Bus
512 DDR333 1-SODIMM------------------512 DDR333 1-SODIMM
80GB HD------------------------------------80GB HD
2x DVD-R-----------------------------------4x DVD-R
ATI 9600 64MB----------------------------NVIDIA FX GO 5600 128MB
10/100/1000------------------------------10/100
56K------------------------------------------56K
Blue Tooth---------------------------------N/A
802.11g------------------------------------802.11g using the PCM CIA Card Slot
OSX-----------------------------------------XP Pro
iPhoto--------------------------------------Dell Picture Studio
iTunes--------------------------------------Dell Jukebox Plus
iMovie---------------------------------------?
iDVD-----------------------------------------?
QuickBooks--------------------------------Microsoft Works/Money

$3849.00----------------------------------$4178.00

While Dell says you can choose a 2X DVD-R and video and DVD software, when I was in the Build to Order section none of these features were available. So the dell may give you a faster Burner but it isn't giving the software to use it out of the box.

This is the Low end P-M 1.3 but performance and price are dead on in comparison and that being said the Mac is the better buy.

[Omek]

Originally posted by cbonz
Yeah, I know this is too soon...but how many more updates do you think the G4 PB will go through before the G5 takes over. I use my computer for video editing but I'm a college student so I need the most bang for my buck. I can probably last this school year if necessary, but no way could I beyond that. I would love a G5 PB but a G4 PB would be great, I just want it to last me at least a few years.

edit: is it worth getting the G4 now...or is it probable that there will be a G5 pb by next August?

I totally agree with you. I just think I'm going to get the 15" though. We'll never "really" know when they're going to release the G5 Powerbook. And if it's soon, I'll be really ticked off, but I'll be glad that I got what I got.

[NoPrideELF]

Originally posted by Ikash
i ordered my powerbook 15" and they haven't shipped yet is this happening to everyone, i hope its not a 4 month wait like the G5's on orders. i hope theyd idn't just make enought to start the buyers

My 15" also has not shipped yet, but there was a problem with my credit card the first day. It says shipping tomorrow. If it doesn't, I'll be more than pissed. keep me updated on yours and I'll do the same.

[macolicous]

I just bought my first ever Mac. I woke up at 7:15am on Tuesday and had to take my hungover a$$ to the campus computer lab because guess what my PC internet was down. I got a 1.25 ghz 15" with everything except the superdrive(sorry no funds I'm going abroad) I also got a 20 gig Ipod. I have a few questions. First it says my shipping date for my PB is On or Before 9/23/03 is that true or is that a date to humor me? Second does anyone know when they are releasing the new iTrips for the iPod? Third I want a really really thin but protective case, sleeve(I know i can't have my cake and eat it too but I have to ask) so that I could fit it in a bookbag. Fourth is there anything I should know special while taking my book abroad, I'm doing semester at sea. Fifth when i get my ipod will it be bad for me to leave it in the charger all the time(leaving cell phones in chargers ruins some batteries). Sixth ?, does anyone have any suggestion on securing my pb other than the kinsington lock. Seventh are there any extras I should get for my pb like covers for the screen and keyboard or anything. I'm pumped to get my full size tower and 21" monzilla off my desk and begin playing with my new PB thanks in advance for any responses.

[depakote]

Thanks for the feeback.

Paul

[neutrino23]

Originally posted by macolicous
... I have a few questions.

1. I think the date is accurate.
2. Don't know
3. Don't know. Try this site
http://www.sjdesign.com/backoffice4.html
4. You will be using the PB on a boat? If so I suggest getting some kind of sealed bag with a desiccant for storing the PB when you are not using it. Salt air can be nasty. You might also want to investigate a power conditioner to prevent power spikes from entering your PB.
If you are going to Europe you will need adapters for the AC and telephone modem. In most of Asia the US style telephone jacks are usable. Japan uses US style AC two prong plugs. Korea, China, Singapore and Australia all use different adapters. I think Taiwan also uses two prong plugs but I my memory isn't clear. In many countries you can usually find a two prong power socket in the bathroom (for your electric shaver). Your PB adapter can work at any voltage up to 240VAC. You just need adapters to fit the hardware.
5. I believe most people leave their iPods plugged in all the time. I have done so for the past year and still get good battery performance.
6. If you can go to an Apple store ask them. There was a story recently that Apple found a replacement for the Kensington security cables that worked better for them.
7. For most usage you should not need a screen cover. Try looking at it from the side with the lid closed. You should be able to see a small gap between the keys and the screen. However, when the PB is placed in a bag or other luggage it might be compressed and then the keys might contact the screen. If you are fussy you can buy a nice protector. I just use a piece of blank paper that I lay on the keyboard before closing the lid. A nice touch would be to cut a piece of soft cloth (lens cleaning cloth?) and use that. Then you could use this cloth to wipe down the PB from time to time.

---
Another thing to consider is a keyboard cover. You can find them here:
http://www.iskinprotect.com/products.html
These will keep the keyboard protected from skin oils and from accidental spills. I haven't used one before but I am considering it for the 15" Al PB I will soon get. I tend to rub off parts of the letters. after a year or so my keyboard looks more Cyrillic than English.

You should also consider insurance. I'm not qualified to give advice on this but it sounds like a good idea.

You should also register it someplace to give you some chance to recover it in case it is stolen. There is also a product I heard of that will "phone home" when it is stolen. This gives you a much higher chance of recovering the stolen item.

Congratulations. Hope you get many happy hours of use from your new PB.

[cak]

One of my main concerns stopping me from upgrading to a 15" (1 or 1.25Ghz) is the speed of java apps. Like limewire, it take 15 bounces to start.

I develop java GUI apps. I couldnt take the time i had to wait for the app to launch. This is worse during development when you change stuff/recompile/and check. Currently i own the first generation of the iBooks (all white) 500Mhz.

Anybody who owns the new pbooks, can throw some light on how fast are they launching java apps. Why is it slow? is it because of the CPU? or GPU? or apples implementation of JAVA???

[esheep2001]

Originally posted by Loopy
If you keep backups of your files on a firewire drive and your G5 gives up on you how would you continue to work if you had a pc. You would have to buy different sets of software + the job you are working on may not run.


DataViz MacOpener
I think you'd be suprised just how much software is cross platform.


I have a G52G + powerbook 15 1.25 on order. As a working musician who buys the software that I use I could not work on 2 platforms.

1. cost
2. compatibility
3. who the ******* wants a PC any way Logic Audio is the best and so is the Mac.


KEEP LIFE EASY BUY 2 MAC'S

:)

Let's not get into sequencer wars here. I do Video on the mac and Music on PC (mainly because of history rather than through choice).

My Seq of choice is Cubase SX which is cross platform. There is nothing on the Mac that comes even close to Cool Edit Pro for wav editing and that's the main reason for hanging on to a PC. The lack of Virtual PC on a G5 is a real blow as I was about to go Mac all the way :(

Max/MSP has now moved to PC. This was one of the main reasons for going Mac for me with music work BTW. Ableton Live is also cross platform and so I can continue live work on the PC should I choose and so there is less urgency to switch.

In an ideal world I would agree with you. But I have legacy PC stuff already in place so switching is not so easy and the cost is the final nail in the coffin. I'm sure I will in the future (hopefully not distant) but for now I have to stick with the PC :(

e.

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by jettredmont
1)[...]This would indicate a fairly short life for these PowerBooks[...]

Exactly. This has been at the back of my mind since the update... There is another sign of that: the 15" screen dimensions. I know it's not much, but Apple has been standardizing the 16:10 aspect ratio across all the lines, yet they didn't change the resolution of the 15". It's not an availability problem, because we all know that 16:10 LCDs exist in a 15" size (just look at the Dell 8600) for a laptop. This would also indicate that Apple was reluctant to change the overall dimensions of the 15", which would have meant a redesign of the mobo... At this point, it looks like Apple ddidn't want to waste too many resources on this update, knowing perfectly well that a major redesign of the PB line is on its way in around 6 month time or so.

My £0.02.

PS: that being said, I still find those PB rather sexy.

[mistersquid]

Originally posted by Stella
There hasn't been a PB rumour today, so I'm going to put that straight.

................

They are able to run a PB to run at 2.5gig, the heat generated is the same as the old 15", so this is fine. These new PB are on course for March 2004 release.

................

Tests so far == 10 hours battery life, running on the G5 PB. So, I can get from Toronto to London using one of these PB on one battery

:-D

Stella, you're just perverse. How can you have all this info about the G5 PB but not a blip about the 7457 release two days ago?

[illumin8]

Originally posted by jrinderle
But those benchmarks are hardly objective. No consideration is given to price. No specs. are given, etc. My suspicion is that the Centrino would have easily won all of the tests if it had a better graphics card. In any case, I am sure it costs far less than the PowerBook.
Most Centrino laptops use the Intel Extreme integrated graphics, which share system RAM with video RAM in order to cut costs. I'm sure that's why the video performance is so poor, especially when compared to the top of the line Radeon 9600.

Not exactly a fair comparison. I would love to see benchmarks comparing the new PowerBooks to a Dell Inspiron 8500 or 8600. That is a more fair comparison because the Inspiron has an Nvidia Geforce420Go graphics card in it so it shouldn't be crippled on the graphics tests.

But bottom line: these are sweet notebooks. I would much rather have the 15" 1.25 G4 over the Dell any day, just for pure battery life, weight, size, and aesthetic beauty. Performance isn't the only metric I use to make a purchasing decision.

[agentmouthwash]

Originally posted by illumin8


But bottom line: these are sweet notebooks. I would much rather have the 15" 1.25 G4 over the Dell any day, just for pure battery life, weight, size, and aesthetic beauty. Performance isn't the only metric I use to make a purchasing decision.

I agree and that's why I purchased one.

[macolicous]

neutrino23, Thank you for your response and info it helped alot!

[macolicous]

Hello everyone I just recently purchased my first Powerbook and I was wondering if anyone had any good websites for powerbook accessories and iPods as well.

[motuman]

Checked out the new 15" at an Apple Retail Store yesterday

Cracked open Terminal and typed in this command: machine

What was the response:

ppc7450

not 7457, this sucks

No 7457

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by motuman
Checked out the new 15" at an Apple Retail Store yesterday

Cracked open Terminal and typed in this command: machine

What was the response:

ppc7450

not 7457, this sucks

No 7457

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Bollocks. So it's either 1 of 2. Either what you got is utterly irrelevant, or you are just making it up. We are so way past that pseudo-information it's not even funny. Yeah right the new 15" uses 7450... Anyone care to comment on that?

[colaboy]

Hi,

I'm trying to decide whether to keep my 15" G4 1ghz powerbook (Nov 2002 edition) or sell it to buy the new 1ghz 12".

When I bought my powerbook g4 1ghz 15" six months ago, I did so because the 12" version was under-specced for my needs (I wanted 1ghz at least, decent graphics capabilities, and DVI output). I'd have preferred the smaller size if all specs were equal, as I move the pb from place to place and prefer something more compact.

Now that the new 12" has been released, has anyone seen any benchmarks that compare the speeds of it against the old 1ghz 15"? And is the Geforce go5200 a better graphics chipset than the radeon 9000 mobility (aside from the fact it's 32mb instead of 64mb)?

I wish apple would treat all the powerbooks reasonably equally, and not assume that those who want smaller screens want smaller specs cpu/gfx wise.

thanks for any advice offered...

[nalfein]

Do anyone asked apple about the ipod deal?

I ordered yesterday 1.25 15" and 10gb ipod, the shipping date for the 1.25 is 23(delayed this mornig) and the shipping date for ipod is october first.

So i dont think i will have the ipod before sept 27.

Will it be possible to get the rebate?
thx

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by motuman
Checked out the new 15" at an Apple Retail Store yesterday

Cracked open Terminal and typed in this command: machine

What was the response:

ppc7450

not 7457, this sucks

No 7457

Oh and by the way I got the answer to my own question: your post is completely irrelevant. I'm currently on a Dual 1.25 FW800 and machine (in the terminal) returns 7450... What do you think of that? <sarcasm>That was a very good first post...</sarcasm> It's good you only got me to answer to your post, cause some other posters could have been a lot less understanding...

[motuman]

I am not bull****ting you these are the results I got:

one of several possibilties:

1) the command line info is correct and uses the 7450

2) the command line info is in error and in reality the CPU really is a 7457


The same command line inquiry done on a G5 reports properly:

ppc970

Maybe these PowerBook G4's for the Apple Store are using the 7450 chip and shipping / production machines will use the 7457, but I doubt it

[bentoon]

Originally posted by Code101
I ordered the 17"
My only problem with it is the HDD. I can't believe Apple didn't put the IBM/Hitachi 7K60 as an option. After I get my 17" Powerbook, I'm going to have to put the 7K60 drive in it. This drive is the only Laptop drive that's 7200 RPM and 8MB cache. Twice as fast as any of the 5400RPM drives.



Very Interesting.
My problem exactly...

1) If you can put this Hitachi HD in the 17" (it's 60 GB) can you then put the original 17"PB HD in and enclosure and use it with a firewire? Something like this:
http://store.yahoo.com/insidecomputer/driveenclosure1.html

2) Second, Honestly, on these machines is the extra RAM going to make a huge difference or is it more a panacea? If I load up on 1.5 or 2 G's of RAM, is the machine really built to be able to take advantage of this? Will I really be able to feel it?

I know that the G5's will be coming soon, and perhaps it's foolish to purchase PB's now,
Yet, these are Fine Machines at a fine price.
Plus my powerbook G3 (Lombard) While it has been with me for 5 years is being held together now by a rubberband. So I Want.
(I may add that 5 years ago I went through mental anguish about dishing out the cash for this G3PB but it has been one of the best investments)

Finally, my Compliments to this site and tremendous information.
After reading steadily for months, I have become compleatly addicted to the enless cycle of craving and grasping.
What will I do now? (I hear there is a 12 step group for MRA's like myself)

[Ikash]

NoPrideELF


my friends paretns own a mac reail store and said it will ship before th 23rd but it would sux to get it on the week cuz i am really bussy so wouldn't have a chance to play with it i mean when it comes its gona be awsome but id perfer it this week or weekend rather than next week. waiting is the hardest.

ANYONE HAVE ANY SHIPPING UPDATES IF SO E MAIL ME OR REPLY

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by motuman
I am not bull****ting you these are the results I got:

one of several possibilties:

1) the command line info is correct and uses the 7450

2) the command line info is in error and in reality the CPU really is a 7457


The same command line inquiry done on a G5 reports properly:

ppc970

Maybe these PowerBook G4's for the Apple Store are using the 7450 chip and shipping / production machines will use the 7457, but I doubt it

Ok I believe you no problem. The thing is, I don't think that command can return the exact processor, but the processor family. It started with the 7450 (is that possible?) and recently all the G4 shipped were 7455 (rev A or rev B). Now the PBs are 7457. But what you get on the machine command doesn't contradict this. Like I said, I got the same answer (7450) on my work dual 1.25 FW800, which is 100% 7455.

Here you go.

[DakotaGuy]

Originally posted by motuman
I am not bull****ting you these are the results I got:

one of several possibilties:

1) the command line info is correct and uses the 7450

2) the command line info is in error and in reality the CPU really is a 7457


The same command line inquiry done on a G5 reports properly:

ppc970

Maybe these PowerBook G4's for the Apple Store are using the 7450 chip and shipping / production machines will use the 7457, but I doubt it

A 7450 never was able to scale past 800Mhz so if they did go back from an 7455 to a 7450 and actually increase the chip from a .18 process to a .22 process I am amazed that they are getting up to 1.33Ghz out of that thing in a laptop without it burning down, melting, or catching fire. When I type machine into my terminal I get ppc750 on both my iBook and my iMac, but my iBook is suppose to have a ppc750cx.

[nalfein]

I hope mine will be ship today i just can't wait to switch, i hate my pc.

[cing2x]

I called and the person I spoke with said he don't know anything about the" take possession of" bit. He said he was instructed to say the offer applies to purchases made by the 27th. But I think you have to mail it in by a certain date.

[WM.]

Originally posted by NicoMan
This would also indicate that Apple was reluctant to change the overall dimensions of the 15", which would have meant a redesign of the mobo...
They absolutely did redesign it. The only similar previous PB mobo was the one in the (January '03) 17" PB, which didn't have the "PCI USB Controller" that gives the new PowerBooks USB 2.0--and I highly doubt that they could simply add that chip and drop the mobo into the smaller case. They would've had to physically change it at the very least...

WM

[depakote]

My 17" PowerBook had been shipped and I should get it tomorrow. I can't wait!

[hacksaw]

Originally posted by csimmons
Forgive me, but you obviously didn't read the entire test result, or you wouldn't have posted such nonsense. Had you read the results and paid attention, you'd have seen that the Centrino beat the G4 in some tests, it was soundly b*tch-slapped by the G4 in the remeining tests.:D

Here Centrino was running on a real video card.
@ http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20030205/centrino-15.html

[Hugin777]

I haven't read the whole thread. Sorry.

I just wanted to point you to Kodawarisan's disassembly of a New PowerBook (http://www.kodawarisan.com/ug/PowerBook/index15.html).

Someone on MacNN asked "dr-mip" which processor it was. It's a 7447.

Don't try this at home ;)

(edit: the MacNN post is here (http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?postid=1592590#post1592590))

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by WM.
They absolutely did redesign it. The only similar previous PB mobo was the one in the (January '03) 17" PB, which didn't have the "PCI USB Controller" that gives the new PowerBooks USB 2.0--and I highly doubt that they could simply add that chip and drop the mobo into the smaller case. They would've had to physically change it at the very least...

WM
What else apart from that USB2 support has been changed on the mobo since the TiBook? If that is it, that's not much, and probably didn't require that much work. You see?

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by Hugin777
Someone on MacNN asked "dr-mip" which processor it was. It's a 7447.

At last we have a final answer. But at this point it doesn't matter much because the 7447 and 7457 work the same (so it appears anyway) once you remove the L3 cache.

[Zuckuss]

Originally posted by nalfein
Do anyone asked apple about the ipod deal?

I ordered yesterday 1.25 15" and 10gb ipod, the shipping date for the 1.25 is 23(delayed this mornig) and the shipping date for ipod is october first.

So i dont think i will have the ipod before sept 27.

Will it be possible to get the rebate?
thx

I ordered a 1.25 15" as well, but I opted for the 20gb ipod. The ipod has shipped and will be arriving monday and the 'book should be shipping monday or tuesday (bto ram). I did, however, order tuesday night, so perhaps I got a one up on your order. It looks like I will get my rebate just fine. Good luck.

[hacurio1]

Originally posted by ddtlm
QCassidy352:


What most people would rather use is heavily influenced by speed compared to other options. Sorry to hear that this bothers you.


Sorry, but you can’t empirically prove this. If you said, “What many/some people would rather use is heavily influenced by speed compared to other options,” then your statement would’ve been correct. At this point, speed is not the only concern; the whole package is what educated people base their decisions on. It is very misleading for a company, or individual, to make a purchase decision based on a single “influential” aspect.

[DrBoar]

The MCP7457 link provided by apple indicate that the CPU only support a 133 MHz bus. The old leaked internal Motorola document "PPCSALESFACT.pdf" state that the CPU support up to 200 MHz bus.

Speed range is 733-1300 MHz and the SPEC numbers are given as SPEC95 not the current SPEC2000:rolleyes:

[Grokgod]

I am hoping that the L2 cache makes up for the missing L3.
SO my real question is wether there are heat issues with this chip and how often the fans come on?

Who has one out there?

[iHack]

Originally posted by NicoMan
Ok I believe you no problem. The thing is, I don't think that command can return the exact processor, but the processor family. It started with the 7450 (is that possible?) and recently all the G4 shipped were 7455 (rev A or rev B). Now the PBs are 7457. But what you get on the machine command doesn't contradict this. Like I said, I got the same answer (7450) on my work dual 1.25 FW800, which is 100% 7455.

Here you go.

I've got a 1Ghz 17" iMac and a 867 MHz 12" PoBo: they both return PPC7450
I guess the info echoed by the terminal isn't accurate and it just means G4?